2017 18 Annual Reading Coach Report Ann… · aQualifications data for the 2017–18 school year were self-reported from districts on a December 2017 survey conducted by the SCDE

STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

MOLLY M. SPEARMAN

STATE SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION

2017–18 Annual Reading Coach Report

Provided to the General Assembly

Pursuant to Proviso 1.62 of the 2017–18 Appropriations Act

and S.C. Code § 59-155-180

January 15, 2018

The South Carolina Department of Education does not discriminate on the basis of race, color,

religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, veteran status, or disability in admission to,

treatment in, or employment in its programs and activities. Inquiries regarding the

nondiscrimination policies should be made to the Employee Relations Manager, 1429 Senate

Street, Columbia, South Carolina 29201, 803-734-8781. For further information on federal non-

discrimination regulations, including Title IX, contact the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights at

[email protected] or call 1-800-421-3481.

mailto:[email protected]

2017–18 Annual Reading Coach Report i

January 15, 2018

Contents

Contents Reporting Requirement ................................................................................................................... 1

Hiring and Assignment of Reading Coaches by Schools ............................................................... 1

Coach Qualification Requirements ................................................................................................. 2

Qualifications .................................................................................................................................. 2

Education Level .......................................................................................................................... 3

Teaching Experience ................................................................................................................... 4

Coaching Experience .................................................................................................................. 5

District Rationale for Hiring ........................................................................................................... 6

Unspent or Unallocated Funds ........................................................................................................ 6

Contacts........................................................................................................................................... 7

Appendix A: Excerpt from § 59-155-180(C)(1)-(3) ....................................................................... 8

Appendix B: Proviso 1.62 (SDE: Reading/Literacy Coaches) and Proviso 1A.61 (SDE-EIA:

Reading/Literacy Coaches), 2017–18 Appropriations Act ............................................................. 9

Appendix C: Number of Coaches by District, 2016-17 and 2017–18 .......................................... 11

References ..................................................................................................................................... 15


January 15, 2018

Page 1

Reporting Requirement

In 2014, Act 284 Read to Succeed, was signed into law by Governor Nikki Haley (codified as

S.C. Code § 59-155-110 et seq.). The legislature designed the law with the intention of

increasing the number of students in South Carolina who can proficiently read and comprehend

grade-level text, especially in the early grades. Research confirms that students reading below

grade level at the end of third grade are six times more likely to leave school without a high

school diploma (Murnane, Sawhill, & Snow 2012). To ensure that practicing teachers possess the

knowledge and skills necessary to assist all students in becoming proficient readers, § 59-155-

180 (C) (1) (2) (3) requires all elementary schools in the state to employ a reading coach (see

Appendix A).

According to § 59-155-180, the reading coach shall:

(a) model effective instructional strategies for teachers by working weekly with students

in whole, and small groups, or individually;

(b) facilitate study groups;

(c) train teachers in data analysis and using data to differentiate instruction;

(d) coaching and mentoring colleagues;

(e) work with teachers to ensure that research-based reading programs are implemented

with fidelity;

(f) work with all teachers (including content area and elective areas) at the school they

serve, and help prioritize time for those teachers, activities, and roles that will have

the greatest impact on student achievement, namely coaching and mentoring in the

classrooms; and

(g) help lead and support reading leadership teams.

Funding and further guidance for the state’s reading coach program is provided in Provisos 1.62

and 1A.61 of the 2017–18 Appropriations Act (see Appendix B). Under the provisos, districts

with schools receiving funding are required to report to the SCDE the name and qualifications of

the funded reading/literacy coaches, the schools in which coaches are assigned, and specific

amounts and uses of proviso funds.

Using data reported by the school districts, the SCDE is required to report to the General

Assembly by January fifteenth of the current fiscal year on the hiring of and assignment of

reading/literacy coaches by school. The SCDE must also report the amount of unspent or

unallocated funds that will be used for Summer Reading Camps.

Hiring and Assignment of Reading Coaches by Schools

As of November 2017 finance records, for the current 2017–18 school year, 660 reading coaches

are assigned to 587 elementary, six primary, and 67 other (intermediate, combination, or middle)

schools. Appendix C lists the numbers of coaches by district.


January 15, 2018

Page 2

Coach Qualification Requirements

Schools and districts accepting funding to support a coaching position agree that the

reading/literacy coach must not serve as an administrator. If the department finds that school

districts are using these funds for administrative costs as defined in statute, they must withhold

that district’s remaining balance of funds allocated pursuant to the proviso.

Per the proviso, the SCDE provides guidelines for employment of funded literacy/reading

coaches a memorandum of agreement with each district. Minimum qualifications are included in

this Memorandum of Agreement, as well as the expectation that the coach will not be used as a

school administrator. Minimum qualifications, as outlined in Proviso 1.62, state that a licensed

or certified teacher is qualified to be employed as a school’s funded reading coach if she or he:

1. holds a bachelor’s degree or higher and an add-on endorsement for literacy coach

or literacy specialist; or

2. holds a bachelor’s degree or higher and is actively pursuing the literacy coach or

literacy specialist endorsement; or

3. holds a master’s degree or higher in reading or a closely-related field.

According to Joyce and Showers (2002), coached teachers use new strategies more

appropriately, exhibit greater long-term retention of knowledge and skills, and are more likely to

explain new strategies to their students. In addition, when teachers are coached on new

knowledge and skills, there is a ninety-five percent transfer to classroom practice. State

qualification guidelines are aligned with the International Literacy Association (2010), which

recommends that a “Reading Specialist/Literacy Coach” have:

a valid teaching certificate;

previous teaching experience;

a master's degree with a concentration in reading and writing education;

program experiences that build knowledge, skills, and dispositions related to

working with students, supporting or coaching teachers, and leading the school

reading program; and

the equivalent of 21–27 graduate semester hours in reading, language arts, and

related courses. The program must include a supervised practicum experience,

typically the equivalent of 6 semester hours. The supervised practicum experience

should require working with students who struggle with reading.

Qualifications

During the 2017–18 academic year, there are 660 state-funded reading coaches across South

Carolina. Tables 1 through 3 show the break-down of coach education levels, years of teaching

experience, and years of coaching experience by number and percentage of coaches. Figures are

provided to demonstrate change from 2016–17 to 2017–18. Qualifications data for the 2017–18

school year, provided in the following tables and figures, were self-reported from districts on a

survey conducted by the SCDE Office of Early Learning and Literacy in December 2017. While

there is a discrepancy between the 660 coaches recorded by the SCDE in Appendix C and the


January 15, 2018

Page 3

610 coaches reported by districts, the self-reported data shown in Tables 1 through 3 and Figures

1 through 3 are still instructive and demonstrate trends.

Education Level

Almost ninety percent of the reading coaches hired in 2017–18 have an advanced degree at the

master’s level or beyond.

Table 1. Reading Coaches by Education Level, 2016–17 and 2017–18

2016-17 2017-18a

Education Level Number Percentage Number Percentage

Bachelors 58 8.6 44 7.2

Bachelors +18 13 1.9 14 2.3

Masters 400 59.2 363 59.5

Masters +18 3 0.5 4 0.7

Masters +30 134 19.8 126 20.7

Ed Specialist 36 5.3 36 5.9

Doctorate 21 3.1 17 2.8

No Report 11 1.6 6 0.9

Total Number 676 610

Note. aQualifications data for the 2017–18 school year were self-reported from districts on a December 2017 survey

conducted by the SCDE Office of Early Learning and Literacy.

As one can see in Figure 1, there has been little significant change in percentages of state-funded

reading coaches by education level from 2016–17 to 2017–18. The majority of state-funded

reading coaches in 2016–17 and 2017–18 possess a master’s degree or master’s degree plus

thirty hours of coursework.


January 15, 2018

Page 4

Figure 1. Comparison of 2016–17 and 2017–18 Percentage of State-Funded Reading Coaches by

Education Level

Figure 1. “No report” data have not been included in figure. See proceeding table for more information.

Teaching Experience

Almost thirty-seven percent of 2017– 18 state-funded reading coaches have more than twenty

years of teaching experience, and over forty-five percent of coaches have between eleven and

twenty years of teaching experience. Only 3.5 percent of 2017–18 reading coaches have five

years or fewer years of teaching experience.

Table 2. Reading Coaches by Years of Teaching Experience, 2016–17 and 2017–18

2016–17 2017–18a

Teaching Experience Number Percentage Number Percentage

1–5 Years 29 4.3 21 3.5

6–10 Years 134 19.8 85 13.9

11–15 Years 137 20.3 141 23.1

16–20 Years 160 23.7 136 22.3

21–25 Years 87 12.9 102 16.7

26+ Years 124 18.3 123 20.2

No Report 5 0.7 2 0.3




As shown in Figure 2, data in 2017–18 show a general shift toward reading coaches having more

than ten years of teaching experience.

010203040506070

2016-17

2017-18


January 15, 2018

Page 5

Figure 2. Comparison of 2016-17 and 2017-18 Percentage of State-Funded Reading Coaches by

Years of Teaching Experience


Coaching Experience

In the 2017–18 school year, over seventy percent of state-funded reading coaches have between

one and four years of coaching experience. The percentage of new coaches, shown by the

percentage of coaches with zero years coaching experience, has decreased by almost six

percentage points.

Table 3. Reading Coaches by Years of Coaching Experience, 2016–17 and 2017–18

2016-17 2017-18a

Coaching Experience Number Percentage Number Percentage

0 Years 104 15.4 58 9.5

1 Year 106 15.7 76 12.5

2 Years 266 39.4 77 12.6

3 Years 49 7.2 156 25.6

4 Years 22 3.3 129 21.1

5 Years 21 3.1 21 3.5

6 Years 10 1.5 11 1.8

7–10 Years 57 8.4 39 6.4

11–15 Years 33 4.9 38 6.2

16+ Years 5 0.7 3 0.5

No Report 3 0.4 2 0.3




0

5

10

15

20

25

1–5 Years

6–10 Years

11–15 Years

16–20 Years

21–25 Years

26+Years

2016-17

2017-18


January 15, 2018

Page 6

As shown in Figure 3, the 2017–18 state-funded reading coaches show more years of coaching

experience. While most coaches in 2016–17 had two years coaching experience, in 2017–18,

this has shifted to the majority of coaches having at least three or four years coaching experience.

As the state’s reading coach cadre continues in its role, it is likely this trend will continue, with

coursework for the Read to Succeed Coach endorsement, mentoring by SCDE reading

specialists, and other state-provided reading coach professional learning opportunities guiding

coach development.

Figure 3. Comparison of 2016-17 and 2017-18 Percentage of State-Funded Reading Coaches by

Years of Coaching Experience


District Rationale for Hiring

The SCDE requested information from districts about their rationales and procedures for hiring

2015–16 reading coaches. Rationales and procedures varied by district and sometimes varied

within districts. The majority of districts reported candidates were interviewed by a team.

Several districts gave autonomy to the building-level principal in selecting the coach. Some

districts mentioned the effectiveness and expertise of the candidate. Some mentioned that

Reading Recovery-certified teachers were given first priority. One district mentioned candidates

were scored with a rubric during an observation or video lesson.

Unspent or Unallocated Funds

For this fiscal year, there are no unallocated funds for use in summer reading camps. In fact, for

the first time there were more requests for coach funding than could be accommodated at

maximum reimbursement rates. The provisos allow payment of up to $62,730 for each

elementary school in which twenty percent or more of students scored below “meets

expectations” on SC READY reading, and $31,365 to schools with less than twenty percent. As

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

2016-17

2017-18


January 15, 2018

Page 7

allowed by Proviso 1.62(K) the SCDE targeted funding to the areas of greatest need based on

“numbers of students substantially failing to demonstrate reading proficiency.”

The SCDE defined need based on the percentage of students that do not meet (DNM) the reading

sub-score of the ELA portion of SC READY. Unfortunately, as stated, there was not enough

available funding ($39 million in 2017-18 versus $42 million in 2016-17) to fund all identified

schools. Per provisos 1.62 and 1A.61, for schools where greater than twenty percent of their

students do not meet expectations, the SCDE will pay the full $62,730 allowed by the provisos.

For schools with less than twenty percent DNM and DNM +Approaching, the SCDE will

fund half, $31,365. For those districts that have worked hard to have less than twenty percent of

their students in DNM but still have a significant number of students in Approaching, the SCDE

will provide partial funding at $41,267.

Some districts declined funding, the state still has several districts with vacant positions, and the

SCDE is still waiting on memoranda of agreement from Greenville and Spartanburg School

District Seven. Any remaining money would first go to new schools and then will be used to

increase the funding for those districts that are partially funded.

Contacts

Dr. David Mathis

Deputy Superintendent

Division of College and Career Readiness

[email protected]

Teresa Broughton

Lead Literacy Specialist

Office of Early Learning and Literacy

[email protected]




January 15, 2018

Page 8

Appendix A: Excerpt from § 59-155-180(C)(1)-(3)

(C)(1) To ensure that practicing professionals possess the knowledge and skills necessary to

assist all children and adolescents in becoming proficient readers, multiple pathways are needed

for developing this capacity.

(2) A reading/literacy coach shall be employed in each elementary school. Reading coaches

shall serve as job-embedded, stable resources for professional development throughout schools

in order to generate improvement in reading and literacy instruction and student achievement.

Reading coaches shall support and provide initial and ongoing professional development to

teachers based on an analysis of student assessment and the provision of differentiated

instruction and intensive intervention. The reading coach shall:

(a) model effective instructional strategies for teachers by working weekly with students

in whole, and small groups, or individually;

(b) facilitate study groups;

(c) train teachers in data analysis and using data to differentiate instruction;

(d) coaching and mentoring colleagues;

(e) work with teachers to ensure that research-based reading programs are implemented

with fidelity;

(f) work with all teachers (including content area and elective areas) at the school they

serve, and help prioritize time for those teachers, activities, and roles that will have the greatest

impact on student achievement, namely coaching and mentoring in the classrooms; and

(g) help lead and support reading leadership teams.

(3) The reading coach must not be assigned a regular classroom teaching assignment, must

not perform administrative functions that deter from the flow of improving reading instruction

and reading performance of students and must not devote a significant portion of his or her time

to administering or coordinating assessments. By August 1, 2014, the department must publish

guidelines that define the minimum qualifications for a reading coach. Beginning in Fiscal Year

2014-2015, reading/literacy coaches are required to earn the add-on certification within six years,

except as exempted in items (4) and (5), by completing the necessary courses or professional

development as required by the department for the add-on. During the six-year period, to

increase the number of qualified reading coaches, the Read to Succeed Office shall identify and

secure courses and professional development opportunities to assist educators in becoming

reading coaches and in earning the literacy add-on endorsement. In addition, the Read to Succeed

Office will establish a process through which a district may be permitted to use state

appropriations for reading coaches to obtain in-school services from department-approved

consultants or vendors, in the event that the school is not successful in identifying and directly

employing a qualified candidate. Districts must provide to the Read to Succeed Office

information on the name and qualifications of reading coaches funded by the state

appropriations.


January 15, 2018

Page 9

Appendix B: Proviso 1.62 (SDE: Reading/Literacy Coaches) and Proviso 1A.61 (SDE-EIA:

Reading/Literacy Coaches), 2017–18 Appropriations Act

(A) Funds appropriated for Reading/Literacy Coaches must be allocated to school districts by the

Department of Education as follows:

(1) for each elementary school in which twenty percent or more of the students scored below

“meets expectations” on the reading sub score of the English language arts test in the most recent

year for which such data are available, the school district shall be eligible to receive the lesser of

up to $62,730 or the actual cost of salary and benefits for a full-time reading/literacy coach; and

(2) for each elementary school in which fewer than twenty percent of the students scored as

referenced in (A)(1), the school district shall be eligible to receive the lesser of up to $31,365 or

fifty percent of the actual cost of salary and benefits for a full-time reading/literacy coach. A

school district must provide local support for state funds provided under this paragraph. School

districts may use existing local funds currently used for reading assistance as the local support.

(B) By accepting these funds, a school district warrants that they will not be used to supplant

existing school district expenditures, except for districts that either are currently, or in the prior

fiscal year, were paying for reading/literacy coaches with local funds. A district may, however,

assign a reading/literacy coach to a primary school rather than to the elementary school to

improve the early literacy skills of young children.

(C) Funds appropriated for reading/literacy Coaches are intended to be used to provide

elementary schools with reading/literacy coaches who shall serve according to the provisions in

Chapter 155 of Title 59.

(D) Schools and districts accepting funding to support a coaching position agree that the

reading/literacy coach must not serve as an administrator. If the department finds that school

districts are using these funds for administrative costs as defined in statute they must withhold

that districts remaining balance of funds allocated pursuant to this proviso.

(E) The Department of Education must publish guidelines that define the minimum qualifications

for a reading/literacy coach. These guidelines must deem any licensed/certified teacher qualified

if, at a minimum, he or she:

(1) holds a bachelor’s degree or higher and an add-on endorsement for literacy coach or literacy

specialist; or

(2) holds a bachelor’s degree or higher and is actively pursuing the literacy coach or literacy

specialist endorsement; or

(3) holds a master’s degree or higher in reading or a closely-related field.

Within these guidelines, the Department of Education must assist districts in identifying a

reading/literacy coach in the event that the school is not successful in identifying and directly

employing a qualified candidate. The provisions of subsection (A), including the local support

requirements, shall also apply to any allocations made pursuant to this paragraph.

(F) The Department of Education must develop procedures for monitoring the use of funds

appropriated for reading/literacy coaches to ensure they are applied to their intended uses and are


January 15, 2018

Page 10

not redirected for other purposes. The Department of Education may receive up to $100,000 of

the funds appropriated for reading/literacy coaches in order to implement this program, provided

that this allocation does not exceed the department’s actual costs.

(G) Prior to the close of the current fiscal year, any unspent or unallocated funds for

reading/literacy coaches shall be used to fund Summer Reading Camps.

(H) The Department of Education shall require:

(1) any school district receiving funding under subsection (A) to identify the name and

qualifications of the supported reading/literacy coach; as well as the school in which the coach is

assigned; and

(2) any school district receiving funding under subsection ( G) to account for the specific

amounts and uses of such funds.

(I) With the data reported by the school districts, the department shall report by January fifteenth

of the current fiscal year on the hiring of and assignment of reading/literacy coaches by school.

The department shall also report the amount of funds that will be used for Summer Reading

Camps.

(J) Funds appropriated for reading/literacy coaches shall be retained and carried forward to be

used for the same purpose but may not be flexed.

(K) For Fiscal Year 2017-18, if increased funding for reading/literacy coaches is not sufficient to

provide additional reading/literacy coaches at each elementary school then the funding must be

targeted to the areas of greatest need based on the number of students substantially failing to

demonstrate reading proficiency as indicated on the prior year’s state assessment.


January 15, 2018

Page 11

Appendix C: Number of Coaches by District, 2016-17 and 2017–18

District

2017-18 2016-17

Elementary

Schools

Primary

Schools

Intermediate

Schools

K-8

Combination

Schools

Middle

Schools

Total

Per

District

Total

Per

District

Abbeville 2 0 0 0 0 2 2

Aiken 18 0 0 1 0 19 21

Allendale 1 0 0 0 0 1 2

Anderson 1 7 0 0 0 0 7 7

Anderson 2 3 0 0 0 0 3 3

Anderson 3 3 0 0 0 0 3 3

Anderson 4 4 0 0 0 0 4 4

Anderson 5 10 0 0 0 0 10 10

Bamberg 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1

Bamberg 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 1

Barnwell 19 1 0 0 0 0 1 1

Barnwell 29 1 0 0 0 0 1 1

Barnwell 45 1 0 0 0 0 1 2

Beaufort 17 0 0 3 0 20 18

Berkeley 16 0 3 1 2 22 19

Calhoun 0 0 0 0 2 2 2

Charleston 42 0 0 2 0 44 35

Cherokee 11 0 0 0 0 11 12

Chester 5 0 0 1 0 6 5

Chesterfield 6 0 1 0 0 7 7

Clarendon 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1

Clarendon 2 1 1 0 0 0 2 2

Clarendon 3 1 0 0 0 0 1 1

Colleton 5 0 0 0 0 5 5

Darlington 9 0 0 1 0 10 10

Dillon 3 1 0 0 0 1 2 1

Dillon 4 5 0 0 0 0 5 5

Dorchester 2 15 0 0 0 0 15 15

Dorchester 4 3 0 0 0 0 3 3

Edgefield 4 0 0 0 0 4 3

Fairfield 5 0 0 0 0 5 4

Florence 1 14 0 1 0 0 15 15


January 15, 2018

Page 12

District

2017-18 2016-17

Elementary

Schools

Primary

Schools

Intermediate

Schools

K-8

Combination

Schools

Middle

Schools

Total

Per

District

Total

Per

District

Florence 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 1

Florence 3 4 0 0 0 0 4 5

Florence 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

Florence 5 1 0 0 0 1 2 2

Georgetown 10 0 0 1 0 11 11

Greenville 53 0 0 1 0 54 51

Greenwood

50

8 0 0 0 0 8 8

Greenwood

51

0 1 0 0 0 1 1

Greenwood

52

1 0 0 0 0 1 1

Hampton 1 4 1 0 0 0 5 5

Hampton 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 1

Horry 29 0 1 1 0 31 27

Jasper 2 0 0 0 0 2 2

Kershaw 10 0 0 0 0 10 10

Lancaster 11 0 0 0 0 11 11

Laurens 55 4 0 0 2 0 6 6

Laurens 56 3 0 0 0 0 3 3

Lee 2 1 0 0 0 3 3

Lexington 1 16 0 0 0 0 16 16

Lexington 2 7 0 0 0 0 7 6

Lexington 3 1 0 0 0 0 1 1

Lexington 4 1 0 1 0 0 2 2

Lexington 5 12 0 0 0 0 12 12

Marion 10 2 0 1 0 0 3 3

Marlboro 0 0 1 4 0 5 5

McCormick 1 0 0 0 0 1 1

Newberry 8 0 0 0 0 8 8

Oconee 10 0 0 0 0 10 10

Orangeburg 3 4 0 0 0 0 4 4

Orangeburg4 3 0 0 0 0 3 3

Orangeburg 5 7 0 0 0 0 7 8


January 15, 2018

Page 13

District

2017-18 2016-17

Elementary

Schools

Primary

Schools

Intermediate

Schools

K-8

Combination

Schools

Middle

Schools

Total

Per

District

Total

Per

District

Pickens 14 0 0 0 0 14 14

Richland 1 29 0 0 0 0 29 29

Richland 2 18 1 1 0 4 24 22

Saluda 1 1 0 0 0 2 3

School for

Deaf and

Blind

0 0 0 2 0 2 0

SC Public

Charter

0 0 0 18 0 18 18

Spartanburg1 4 0 1 1 0 6 6







Sumter 15 0 0 0 0 15 15

Union 5 0 0 0 0 5 5

Williamsburg 3 0 0 1 0 4 5

York 1 5 0 1 0 0 6 6

York 2 4 0 0 0 0 4 4

York 3 16 0 0 1 0 17 17

York 4 9 0 0 0 0 9 9

Grand Total 587 6 15 42 10 660 640


January 15, 2018

Page 14


January 15, 2018

Page 15

References

International Literacy Association. (2010). Standards 2010: Reading Specialist/LiteracyCoach.

https://www.literacyworldwide.org/get-resources/standards/standards-for-reading-

professionals/standards-2010-role-5

Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (2002). Student achievement through staff development (3rd ed.).

Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Murnane, R., Sawhill, I., & Snow, C. (2012). Literacy challenges for the twenty first century:

Introducing the issue. The Future of Children, 22, 3–15.

https://www.literacyworldwide.org/get-resources/standards/standards-for-reading-%20professionals/standards-2010-role-5

https://www.literacyworldwide.org/get-resources/standards/standards-for-reading-%20professionals/standards-2010-role-5

Documents

2017 18 Annual Reading Coach Report Ann… · aQualifications data for the 2017–18 school year were self-reported from districts on a December 2017 survey conducted by the SCDE